There is a very interesting prophecy in the Old Testament about what we now call the Gog-Magog War.
This prophecy says a coalition of Middle East countries along with Russia will attack Israel when Israel is living at peace.
The 64,000 dollar question is "When will Israel ever be able to live in peace?"
Perhaps ISIS will be the catalyst for that peace.
The Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds and Wasabis hate each other and all consider the others to be the Islamic equivalent of heretics.
Maybe the Sunnis and Shiites and Kurds and Wasabis will effectively wipe each other out, leaving Israel the only functioning state in the region with a military worthy of the name.

I have no idea of the specific details of end times but it sure is interesting to read the news, look at maps of the Middle East and try to put 2 and 2 together.
I believe everything happens for a reason and ISIS is no exception.

It is not true all Sunnies and Shiites hate each other. Many share the same community and even the same Mosques. I do not know many Kurds but doubt that they hate other Muslims. They just want independence.

I doubt that they will wipe out one another> Christians try this in the past in many counties but did not succeed.

ISIS: A cult without allies
Though most Mideast rebel groups are allied with either Saudi Arabia or Iran, ISIS stands alone. The self-proclaimed caliphate has embraced an extremist, medieval form of Sunni Islam in which Shiites (as well as Yazidis, Christians, and all other "infidels") can be justifiably slaughtered. Shiite Iran, naturally, sees ISIS as a direct threat. But even Sunni Saudi Arabia is horrified by the jihadist group's rise — a great irony, given that the seeds for ISIS's ideology were sown by the extreme, Wahhabi-Salafist form of Islam that Saudi Arabia has supported, funded, and exported for decades. ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is no fan of the U.S.-allied Saudi monarchy, calling it the "head of the snake and stronghold of disease." This gives ISIS quite a list of enemies: the Saudis, Iran, Syria, Turkey, Egypt, the U.S., and the nations of the European Union. ISIS, says F. Gregory Gause of the Brookings Institution, "has the unique ability to unite most of the players in the new Middle East against it." In the long run, that makes the terrorist group unlikely to survive the struggle for control of the region.

One of the reasons peace is difficult in the Middle East is that Muslims fight amongst themselves almost constantly. The only thing they seem to agree on is that they hate the US and they hate all Jews, especially Israel.

Here is a recent article from the web site Prophesy Newswatch concerning Muslim vs Muslim.
I don't think it is unreasonable to conjecture that intra-Muslim enmity might result in an all out Muslim vs Mslim war.

Share this article
Since its creation 85 years ago, Saudi Arabia has acquired a reputation as a country that tries to avoid confrontation with its neighbours at all costs. During the long war between Iran and Iraq during the 1980s the Saudis desperately sought to preserve their neutrality, even if Riyadh’s sympathies lay with its fellow Sunni co-religionists in Iraq rather than the Shi’ite Muslim hardliners running Iran.

Similarly, Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the two Gulf wars against Saddam Hussein was kept to a minimum. Saudi warplanes made a modest contribution to the overall air campaign during the 1991 liberation of Kuwait, while Riyadh steadfastly refused to involve itself in the 2003 Iraq war. In other conflicts affecting the region, such as the Palestinian intifada, the Saudis have preferred to channel their immense oil wealth in support of Arab allies rather than become directly involved in the strife.

But then this year came Saudi Arabia’s dramatic military intervention in neighbouring Yemen. Saudi warplanes and troops are now involved in a bitter conflict with Iranian-backed rebels from the Houthi religious movement in Yemen. And Saudi Arabia has been confirmed as one of the region’s dominant military powers.

In the past two years, it has beaten Britain into fourth place in the world’s military spending league with a defence budget of around 37 billion pounds (compared with the UK at around 34 billion pounds).

The military offensive in Yemen has seen Saudi Arabia deploy an estimated 150,000 troops – nearly twice the size of the British Army – while Saudi fighter jets, many of them British-made, have flown thousands of sorties.

Now the Saudis have raised the alarming prospect of the Middle East becoming embroiled in a nuclear arms race after the country’s blunt warning that “all options are on the table” if Iran fails to resolve the international stand-off over its nuclear programme.

Prince Mohammed bin Nawwaf bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, Saudi Arabia’s long-serving ambassador to London, says that for many years the kingdom upheld the policy established by the late King Fahd that Riyadh would not pursue a policy of developing nuclear weapons. “Then it became known that Iran was pursuing a policy that could be shifted to a weapons-of-mass-destruction programme,” Prince Mohammed explained in an exclusive interview with The Daily Telegraph. “This has changed the whole outlook in the region.”

Like many in the Arab world and beyond, the Saudis are hoping the current negotiations with Iran on the nuclear issue, being led by U.S. President Barack Obama, will provide assurances that Tehran does not possess the means to build an atom bomb.

“We have always expressed our support for resolving the Iranian nuclear file in a diplomatic way and through negotiation,” said Prince Mohammed. “We commend the American president’s effort in this regard, provided that any deal reached is watertight and is not the kind of deal that offers Iran a license to continue its destabilizing foreign policies in the region. The proof is in the pudding.”

Negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 – the U.S., the U.K., France, China and Russia (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council) and Germany – are due to be concluded by the end of this month.

Negotiators are pressing Tehran to freeze key elements of its uranium-enrichment cycle – which can be used to produce nuclear warheads – in return for easing the sanctions that have crippled the Iranian economy.

Despite attempts lasting more than a decade to resolve the issue, Iran has yet to make any significant concessions on its nuclear programme.

The New York Times reported last week that Tehran’s stockpile of nuclear fuel had increased by 20 per cent in the past 18 months. That would make a nonsense of the Obama administration’s contention that Iran had frozen its enrichment operations for the duration of the negotiations. Consequently, there are fears in Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states that Obama is more interested in reaching an accommodation with reformists in Iran than in standing by America’s traditional allies in the Arab world.

“Iran’s nuclear programme poses a direct threat to the entire region and constitutes a major source and incentive for nuclear proliferation across the Middle East, including Israel.”

Western intelligence agencies believe that the Saudi monarchy paid for up to 60 per cent of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, in return for the ability to buy warheads for itself at short notice. Any failure by Iran to provide the necessary safeguards by the end of this month could see Riyadh activate that deal, thereby enabling Saudi Arabia to become the Arab world’s first nuclear power. And if that we